Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Knowledge, Acceptance, and Uptake of Family Planning: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of Group Antenatal Care in Ghana.
Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of group antenatal care on maternal health continuum of care and perinatal outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of group antenatal care on lactational amenorrhea method awareness and knowledge: A cluster randomized control trial.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Evaluation of postnatal outcomes from a group antenatal care intervention in Nigeria: a quasi-experimental study.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a group antenatal care intervention in two Northern Nigerian states: Quasi-experimental study.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of family planning (FP) methods significantly contributes to improved outcomes for mothers and their offspring. However, the use of FP remains low, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. A cluster randomized controlled clinical trial was implemented in Ghana, comparing group antenatal care (ANC) with routine care. The group ANC intervention included eight meetings where the seventh group meeting incorporated information and discussion regarding methods of FP. Data collection occurred at five time points: baseline (T0), 34 weeks' gestation (T1), 6-12 weeks post birth (T2), 5-8 months post birth, and 11-14 months post birth (T4). At T1, there was a significantly greater increase in the knowledge of FP methods as well as the intention to use FP after the birth among the intervention group. The uptake of FP was significantly higher in the intervention group for all post-birth timepoints except for T4 where the control group had significantly higher rates. The reasons for the diminishing effect are unclear. An increasing uptake of FP methods requires a multifaceted approach that includes increasing accessibility, knowledge, and acceptability as well as addressing societal and cultural norms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.